Background: Observational studies have suggested that accelerated surgery is associated with improved outcomes in patients with a hip fracture. The HIP ATTACK trial assessed whether accelerated surgery could reduce mortality and major complications.
Methods:We randomised 2970 patients from 69 hospitals in 17 countries. Patients with a hip fracture that required surgery and were ≥45 years of age were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned to accelerated surgery (goal of surgery within 6 hours of diagnosis; 1487 patients) or standard care (1483 patients). The co-primary outcomes were 1.) mortality, and 2.) a composite of major complications (i.e., mortality and non-fatal myocardial infarction, stroke, venous thromboembolism, sepsis, pneumonia, life-threatening bleeding, and major bleeding) at 90 days after randomisation. Outcome adjudicators were masked to treatment allocation, and patients were analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle; ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02027896.
Findings:The median time from hip fracture diagnosis to surgery was 6 hours (interquartile range [IQR] 4-9) in the accelerated-surgery group and 24 hours (IQR 10-42) in the standard-care group, p<0.0001. Death occurred in 140 patients (9%) assigned to accelerated surgery and 154 patients (10%) assigned to standard care; hazard ratio (HR) 0.91, 95% CI 0.72-1.14; absolute risk reduction (ARR) 1%, 95% CI -1-3%; p=0.40. The primary composite outcome occurred in 321 patients (22%) randomised to accelerated surgery and 331 patients (22%) randomised to standard care; HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.83-1.13; ARR 1%, 95% CI -2-3%; p=0.71.Interpretation: Among patients with a hip fracture, accelerated surgery did not significantly lower the risk of mortality or a composite of major complications compared to standard care.
LF-rTMS and HF-rTMS are both beneficial to the recovery of linguistic function in patients with post-stroke non-fluent aphasia. LF-rTMS produced immediate benefits that persisted long-term, while HF-rTMS only produced long-term benefits. In addition, the benefits produced with LF-rTMS were more marked than those produced by HF-rTMS.
Purpose Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a worldwide pandemic. The toughest issue traumatic orthopaedic surgeons are faced with is how to maintain a balance between adequate COVID-19 screening and timely surgery. In this study, we described our experience with pre-operative COVID-19 screening in patients with traumatic fractures. Furthermore, we analysed the clinical results of fracture patients undergoing confined or emergency surgery during the COVID-19 outbreak. Methods This was a case series study. Patients with traumatic fractures who were admitted to our hospital for surgery were enrolled in this study during the COVID-19 outbreak from March to April 2020. All patients were enrolled and managed using the standardized clinical pathway we designed for preoperative COVID-19 screening. Clinical, laboratory and outcome data were analysed. Results The average surgery waiting time from injury to surgery was 8.7 ± 3.4 days. The average waiting time from admission to surgery was 5.3 ± 2.8 days. These average waiting times were increased by 4.1 days and 2.0 days, respectively, compared with 2019 data. Cardiovascular complications, venous thromboembolism and pneumonia occurred in one, two and one patient, respectively. Three and two patients developed pre-operative and postoperative fevers, respectively. Conclusions We introduced a novel clinical pathway for pre-operatively screening of COVID-19 in traumatic orthopaedic patients. The delay in surgery caused by COVID-19 screening was minimized to a point at which reasonable and acceptable clinical outcomes were achieved. Doctors should pay more attention to perioperative complications, such as cardiovascular complications, venous thromboembolism, pneumonia and fever.
Internal fixation by CPS is an effective method for olecranon fracture and is associated with a shorter healing time, fewer complications and better function than TBW.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.